Question 3 opens a door to abuse

In theory, the acceptance of marijuana for medicinal purposes, particularly for cancer patients and those suffering effects from debilitating diseases, appears to have reached a popular threshold among Massachusetts citizens. Polls show more than 60 percent of registered voters are in favor of approving the initiative. They see it as harmless in a state that already has decriminalized marijuana statutes.

In the new legal environment, how could anyone not be in favor of medical marijuana for people in need of pain relief?

Well, the issue is more complex than it seems. In Greater Lowell, the number of deaths among young people using opiates has skyrocketed while the number of addictions among adolescents and adults is soaring. The sad truth is that good people are being hollowed out by addictions, and families are suffering the tragic consequences.

Some young people have become addicted to opiates by raiding their parents' medicine cabinets. So, in deciding Question 3, voters must answer: Can the state properly regulate medical-marijuana usage among those patients who are licensed to obtain it? And will those patients, some of whom will be permitted to grow marijuana in their homes and backyards, be responsible enough to keep the pot secure so that others don't use it?

Under the proposed initiative, the state would establish as many as 35 marijuana regulation centers -- or pot shops -- where patients will be able to fill doctor-approved prescriptions.

Advertisement

Where will they be sited? Does Chelmsford want one? How about Dracut or Groton or Tewksbury? The City of Lowell already has a methadone clinic, ill-advisedly situated near UMass Lowell's East campus, that draws in addicts from dozens of communities. Some city leaders do not want a marijuana clinic in Lowell. We agree.

In addition, who is going to go around checking in private yards whether a patient is growing a suitable amount of marijuana for his or her needs, or growing an excess amount for what could lead to a criminal enterprise?

There is already too much government regulation in place. Is Massachusetts now going to create a new army of backyard pot patrolers -- at taxpayers' expense -- to drive through neighborhoods and survey everyone's backyard? That's ridiculous. Yet we can see a new bureaucracy growing as rapidly as pot plants.

The Massachusetts Medical Society, the statewide association of 24,000 licensed physicians, opposes Question 3 because of the health risks posed by marijuana. The contents of marijuana smoke are more poisonous than tobacco smoke, the MMS notes, and its use has been associated with long-term impairment of mental capacity. The group wants more scientific study done to justify pot use for relieving pain.

In the wake of the Jamaica Plain state-police drug-lab scandal, where regulatory controls were lacking and drug evidence was altered, we can't see how the state would be able to properly monitor 35 pot shops in communities across Massachusetts. Like we said before, in theory, Question 3 sounds reasonable. In reality, it's another open door to abuse.

Welcome to your discussion forum: Sign in with a Disqus account or your social networking account for your comment to be posted immediately, provided it meets the guidelines. (READ HOW.)
Comments made here are the sole responsibility of the person posting them; these comments do not reflect the opinion of The Sun. So keep it civil.